EFL Verdict

[Carnero]

3 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

The big question is, why haven't the revised accounts been submitted

In 2 days?

Get a grip.

[atherstoneram]

1 minute ago, Carnero said:

In 2 days?

Get a grip.

Me get a grip,are you for real

[glyn1957]

3 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

If the LAP had awarded a punishment, it would have been final with no right of appeal for either side.  They felt it was better to bat it back to the DC and then either side can appeal.

Thank you for explaining that for me .

[WhiteHorseRam]

3 minutes ago, Carnero said:

In 2 days?

Get a grip.

[Carnero]

Just now, atherstoneram said:

Me get a grip,are you for real

Yes i am. Why would revised accounts have been prepared, reviewed, approved & submitted all in the space of 2 days since the verdict? Get real.

[WhiteHorseRam]

7 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

The big question is, why haven't the revised accounts been submitted

[Indy]

7 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

The big question is, why haven't the revised accounts been submitted

Because professionally preparing and finalising accounts costs money, and DCFC were only made aware that it needed doing sometime on Wednesday evening.
 

And they have until 18 August to do it, so no rush there (although the quicker the better to lift the soft transfer embargo). 

[RadioactiveWaste]

17 minutes ago, glyn1957 said:

Rarely do i comment on here but read the forum most days, so i would like to know why the LAP panel who did find against us did not punish DCFC then but instead chose to send it back to the DC panel i believe after discussions with both parties ,was that because there thinking was that the DC panels decision would be more equitable for both DCFC and the EFL.

 

I think the LAP refered it back for a few reasons, enable appeals on the sanctions, didn't want to set precidence for the sanctions themselves, viewed their role only as reviewing the decision reached by the DC.

Presumably they'll now hear the appeal and make a judgment on the sanction based on what's submitted in the appeal. I don't think we can really gauge any more until the full report comes out.

It may be the DC wasn't lienient and in fact the fine is what is appropreate as the accounting policy itself is a technical non-conformance and the view is the further punishments from the resubmitted accounts are where the "meat" of any sanctions will be. Or it might be that the ""sneaky" accouting of itself is worth a deduction. Also should any deduction be applied to the season finished.

I would be your bottom dollar though that if the revised P&S submissions show a spending breach we will get slapped with extra deductions based on us trying to manipulate them in the accounts.

[RadioactiveWaste]

1 minute ago, Indy said:

Because professionally preparing and finalising accounts costs money, and DCFC were only made aware that it needed doing sometime on Wednesday evening.
 

And they have until 18 August to do it, so no rush there (although the quicker the better to lift the soft transfer embargo). 

I'd be pretty sure the accounts have been prepared (in case of this eventuality) but DCFC couldn't present them to an auditor until the judgment was finalised (with the requirment to resubmit) without potnetially prejudicing their own position. Probably got sent for audit the next day, once that's been performed they can be submitted. No idea on the time scale, but with the auitor having to be independant from DCFC that's my take on it.

[Spanish]

1 minute ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

I'd be pretty sure the accounts have been prepared (in case of this eventuality) but DCFC couldn't present them to an auditor until the judgment was finalised (with the requirment to resubmit) without potnetially prejudicing their own position. Probably got sent for audit the next day, once that's been performed they can be submitted. No idea on the time scale, but with the auitor having to be independant from DCFC that's my take on it.

The PS summary is not audited

[Gringo]

4 minutes ago, Indy said:

Because professionally preparing and finalising accounts costs money, and DCFC were only made aware that it needed doing sometime on Wednesday evening.
 

And they have until 18 August to do it, so no rush there (although the quicker the better to lift the soft transfer embargo). 

Even Kieran Maguire said last night on the Rams review podcast that our finance department should go on an extended vacation so that we cannot submit the books until the last minute, as then the EFL would not be able to relegate the Rams.

[GenBr]

5 minutes ago, Indy said:

Because professionally preparing and finalising accounts costs money, and DCFC were only made aware that it needed doing sometime on Wednesday evening.
 

And they have until 18 August to do it, so no rush there (although the quicker the better to lift the soft transfer embargo). 

I think Pearce said somewhere that  for the last set of accounts we'd prepared two sets depending on the outcome of the appeals, etc. Dunno if they'd done similar for the other years, but even if they had it still wouldn't be a quick process to get this sorted.

[Indy]

6 minutes ago, GenBr said:

I think Pearce said somewhere that  for the last set of accounts we'd prepared two sets depending on the outcome of the appeals, etc. Dunno if they'd done similar for the other years, but even if they had it still wouldn't be a quick process to get this sorted.

Yes. This is what I mean. I’m sure that have a reasonable set prepared so they know what the position is likely to be. But the final stage of getting them fully prepared, written up etc to audit compliant standards would still need to be done. 

[Spanish]

6 minutes ago, GenBr said:

I think Pearce said somewhere that  for the last set of accounts we'd prepared two sets depending on the outcome of the appeals, etc. Dunno if they'd done similar for the other years, but even if they had it still wouldn't be a quick process to get this sorted.

The restated accounts may breach the rules, the efl will report to the DC, the DC will hold a meeting to decide the penalty, the penalty will be appealed to the LAP.  Can’t see how this will be completed before the start of the season.  What do you think as I am always interested in the views of a real fan

[kevinhectoring]

1 hour ago, Carnero said:

In 2 days?

Get a grip.

We have had many months to update them and the revised accounts must now exist. Maybe we’re holding on to them because we don’t want EFL to rush through another charge before next season 

Edited June 25, 2021 by kevinhectoring

[chadlad]

As I understand the situation we have been fined £100,000, in football terms a derisory amount. I would normally call this one hell of a result!

We are also required to resubmit our financial submissions to the EFL taking into account the “correct” method of revaluation of player registrations by the 18th August 2021. This should not be a shock or a surprise to anyone, as soon as the EFL won the appeal it was obvious that this would need to happen. I would imagine that DCFC recalculations were completed some time ago.

Hopefully the revised figures will pass FFP requirements, if not then we face a probable point deduction next season.

However in an attempt perhaps to save face the EFL claims that they have drawn two sets of fixtures allowing Wycombe to replace DCFC in the Championship this coming season, in certain somewhat unlikely circumstances.

I have to ask why they have gone to the trouble of announcing this? There was no need to say anything, they could have kept it quiet. The EFL it seems are intent on destroying our historic club. Few players will even consider signing for us with this knowledge and in these circumstances, relegation this season seems inevitable even without a points deduction and with the possibility of L2 the following season. Certain people it would seem are mindlessly pursuing a personal vendetta against our owner and in the process are willing to destroy one of the football leagues founding members.

Who supervises the EFL? Try Googling it. The answer is seemingly nobody, they can do as they wish - if you don’t like it - tough. My own suggestion is contact your MP, write, email or call, ask him or her to raise a question in Parliament- why not!

I believe that the club has been far too passive, almost submissive so far. Bully’s don’t like it when you fight back.
 

 

[DCFC1388]

1 hour ago, Charlotte Ram said:

Even Kieran Maguire said last night on the Rams review podcast that our finance department should go on an extended vacation so that we cannot submit the books until the last minute, as then the EFL would not be able to relegate the Rams.

Kieran Maguire is wrong then as submitting the books has no baring on us being relegated, if we failed p&s it would be a possible point deduction on the 21/22 season regardless of division

Edited June 25, 2021 by DCFC1388

[DCFC1388]

I really cant see any form of panel whether its the IDC or LAP or someone else giving the EFL what they want and giving a retrospective point deduction, its such a drastic punishment. The EFL can want it as much as they like, doesnt mean they will get it!

[Eatonram]

21 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

We have had many months to update them and the revised accounts must now exist. Maybe we’re holding on to them because we don’t want EFL to rush through another charge before next season 

TBH even if the accounts were within P And S limits I think I would wait till the very last minute.

[Yani P]

I would be surprised and disappointed if Derby are not at least looking into potential litigation against the EFL, the Chairmen driving this witch hunt and certainly the owner of Wycombe for his cheating comments..